These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Winter] Combat Cruisers

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#441 - 2012-10-09 15:36:08 UTC
It would be nice to see the vexor gain a armor rep bonus in exchange for the hybrid bonus, as it has fewer slots making it harded to tank.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#442 - 2012-10-09 15:42:20 UTC
Dato Koppla wrote:
Major killz is deaf to any other opinion, so there's no point trying to discuss anything with him, wasted my time =/

I was just posting a constructive well thought out opinion which is what these threads are all about, at least I got my point out there.


Yeah well go be constructive in z thread about z Ore frigate or whatever. The Rupture is inline with everything else. The Vexor is not and if there is a issue or problem then look there.

As for z Moa and Maller v0v

You cant do much to z moa without making it too battlecruiser. The thing would be a BC in all its stats except z name because you could put a silly bc tank on it and have bc damage. All because of an extra mid slot.

Z Maller is a armor tanking ship in a class about speed, damage and mobility... @tleast give it an optimal range bonus. More damage projection v0v

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Aglais
Ice-Storm
#443 - 2012-10-09 16:13:14 UTC
Major Killz wrote:


You cant do much to z moa without making it too battlecruiser. The thing would be a BC in all its stats except z name because you could put a silly bc tank on it and have bc damage. All because of an extra mid slot.



...Because the fifth medslot is totally for fitting another LSE II.

No, the fifth med slot would be best utilized with a webifier. The Moa is slow. Currently, with only four medslots (which I will point out, for the nth time, this is the same amount of medslots that BOTH the Rupture and Vexor have, making the Moa far too similar and at the same time much worse than these two due to being a shield tanker) you have to sacrifice tank to actually be able to catch people.

"bluh stop complaining about how you have to sacrifice something for something else in pvp its only fair"

If you comment with this, you don't get it. You have to actually decrease your tank, to fit a utility that EVERY OTHER SHIP CAN MAKE USE OF, in the one ship that arguably needs it the MOST seeing as the Moa is the slowest! Yes. The Moa will end up having more defense than the other combat cruisers. So? That's it's defining characteristic. It's a hardened hybrid turret cruiser. Every one of these ships should have something that sets them apart. Right now the Moa is just a homogenization of the other three cruisers but with a shield tank that wont work because you don't have the slots to pull it off.

You will not approach battlecruiser levels of tank in a Moa unless you're utterly failfitting it! Who cares if there are bait mallers and bait moas. They're exactly that, bait. They can't do whipping bugwinged f-ckall except soak up idiotic amounts of damage. No damage, no speed, just tank.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#444 - 2012-10-09 16:23:11 UTC
I love coming into this thread to check for CCP Fozzie replies. I leave feeling a little less smart. Maybe if there weren't two pages of dev posts that consist of CCP Punkturis responding to really bad, obnoxious flirting?
Zhephell
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#445 - 2012-10-09 16:24:35 UTC
Major Killz wrote:
Dato Koppla wrote:
Major killz is deaf to any other opinion, so there's no point trying to discuss anything with him, wasted my time =/

I was just posting a constructive well thought out opinion which is what these threads are all about, at least I got my point out there.


Yeah well go be constructive in z thread about z Ore frigate or whatever. The Rupture is inline with everything else. The Vexor is not and if there is a issue or problem then look there.

As for z Moa and Maller v0v

You cant do much to z moa without making it too battlecruiser. The thing would be a BC in all its stats except z name because you could put a silly bc tank on it and have bc damage. All because of an extra mid slot.

Z Maller is a armor tanking ship in a class about speed, damage and mobility... @tleast give it an optimal range bonus. More damage projection v0v


....
Reading this post, i can say that many of the things you're saying are a nonsense

And you have to know, you're doing a mistake, trying to argue like this.
I have see some of your posts, and you should have more decency when you argue with someone, no matter if you are disagree. If you don't do that, you ll have posts that will criticize you, saying you're stupid, you're a child, or other things
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#446 - 2012-10-09 16:27:07 UTC
Aglais wrote:
Major Killz wrote:


You cant do much to z moa without making it too battlecruiser. The thing would be a BC in all its stats except z name because you could put a silly bc tank on it and have bc damage. All because of an extra mid slot.



...Because the fifth medslot is totally for fitting another LSE II.

No, the fifth med slot would be best utilized with a webifier. The Moa is slow. Currently, with only four medslots (which I will point out, for the nth time, this is the same amount of medslots that BOTH the Rupture and Vexor have, making the Moa far too similar and at the same time much worse than these two due to being a shield tanker) you have to sacrifice tank to actually be able to catch people.

"bluh stop complaining about how you have to sacrifice something for something else in pvp its only fair"

If you comment with this, you don't get it. You have to actually decrease your tank, to fit a utility that EVERY OTHER SHIP CAN MAKE USE OF, in the one ship that arguably needs it the MOST seeing as the Moa is the slowest! Yes. The Moa will end up having more defense than the other combat cruisers. So? That's it's defining characteristic. It's a hardened hybrid turret cruiser. Every one of these ships should have something that sets them apart. Right now the Moa is just a homogenization of the other three cruisers but with a shield tank that wont work because you don't have the slots to pull it off.

You will not approach battlecruiser levels of tank in a Moa unless you're utterly failfitting it! Who cares if there are bait mallers and bait moas. They're exactly that, bait. They can't do whipping bugwinged f-ckall except soak up idiotic amounts of damage. No damage, no speed, just tank.



Yes! Because everyone will use a fifth mid slot to fit a stasis webifier instead of replicating a Ferox hit points. The rest of your arguments/comments made no sense or was TAR TAR.

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#447 - 2012-10-09 16:28:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Killz
Zhephell wrote:
Major Killz wrote:
Dato Koppla wrote:
Major killz is deaf to any other opinion, so there's no point trying to discuss anything with him, wasted my time =/

I was just posting a constructive well thought out opinion which is what these threads are all about, at least I got my point out there.


Yeah well go be constructive in z thread about z Ore frigate or whatever. The Rupture is inline with everything else. The Vexor is not and if there is a issue or problem then look there.

As for z Moa and Maller v0v

You cant do much to z moa without making it too battlecruiser. The thing would be a BC in all its stats except z name because you could put a silly bc tank on it and have bc damage. All because of an extra mid slot.

Z Maller is a armor tanking ship in a class about speed, damage and mobility... @tleast give it an optimal range bonus. More damage projection v0v


....
Reading this post, i can say that many of the things you're saying are a nonsense

And you have to know, you're doing a mistake, trying to argue like this.
I have see some of your posts, and you should have more decency when you argue with someone, no matter if you are disagree. If you don't do that, you ll have posts that will criticize you, saying you're stupid, you're a child, or other things



Congratulations...

- Thread baby sitting is hard work

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Aglais
Ice-Storm
#448 - 2012-10-09 16:39:36 UTC
Major Killz wrote:

Yes! Because everyone will use a fifth mid slot to fit a stasis webifier instead of replicating a Ferox hit points. The rest of your arguments/comments made no sense or was TAR TAR.


The rest of my comments in that post were directly related to reasons as to why a fifth medslot and a webifier is the logical choice. The thing is, this isn't going to make the Moa comparable to a battlecruiser, at all! It's still going to have less EHP than a Ferox, and less DPS, but at the same time it's going to be much faster. The Moa and Ferox will both be resist bonused hybrid ships, but the exact roles they play is going to be subtly different. Furthermore, the addition of a medslot only affects damage application, not the actual amount of DPS that is being put out by the ship. There's no reason to 'fear' putting a fifth medium slot on the Moa, at all.

Also, please enlighten me as to what "TAR TAR" means.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#449 - 2012-10-09 17:04:17 UTC
Aglais wrote:
Major Killz wrote:

Yes! Because everyone will use a fifth mid slot to fit a stasis webifier instead of replicating a Ferox hit points. The rest of your arguments/comments made no sense or was TAR TAR.


The rest of my comments in that post were directly related to reasons as to why a fifth medslot and a webifier is the logical choice. The thing is, this isn't going to make the Moa comparable to a battlecruiser, at all! It's still going to have less EHP than a Ferox, and less DPS, but at the same time it's going to be much faster. The Moa and Ferox will both be resist bonused hybrid ships, but the exact roles they play is going to be subtly different. Furthermore, the addition of a medslot only affects damage application, not the actual amount of DPS that is being put out by the ship. There's no reason to 'fear' putting a fifth medium slot on the Moa, at all.

Also, please enlighten me as to what "TAR TAR" means.



Honestly. It's like those players who continue to come this thread going on about how a Rupture does 450damage per second @ 20km. Apparently, actually game mechanics don't apply (falloff). Kinda like 2 inverted damage curves or something TAR TAR.

The propose Moa will infact do more damage compared to a Ferox, because of it's damage bonus. The Ferox would need drones to overcome the difference and even then it's minute (effectively, same damage output). I exaggerated with regard to hit points comparable to a Ferox. It's comparable to a armor-Hurricane, Brutix and Harbinger (60,000 effective hit points). CCP increased it's shield amount which is why it would gain so much from another mid slot and shield extension rigs.

So, yeah! Hit points and damage of teir 1 and some tier 2 battlecruisers.

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Dr Sheng-Ji Yang
Doomheim
#450 - 2012-10-09 17:23:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Dr Sheng-Ji Yang
@Major Killz
please stop trolling in every forum how underpowered and bad minmatar actually are. Everybody knows (really EVERYBODY) that minmatar ships are still completely overpowered and you seem to think we are completely idiots believing your s....hiny stuff.
Rupture is already able to do more than 460dps at almost 18km with damage type choosing plus awesome speed plus tracking that makes every rail and laser guy jealous plus good tank. Not to foreget how powerfull dmg type choosing is.
Stop trolling and thinking we are idiots.
Aglais
Ice-Storm
#451 - 2012-10-09 17:23:49 UTC
Ok. Several things.

1) Ferox has a range bonus. Even if the Moa is doing more damage, it has to get closer which again necessitates that if it's using blasters it'll need a webifier.
2) What the hell kind of fit are you even considering here?! Currently, I can't get a Moa with more than about 32k EHP, which is just over HALF that of the battlecruisers you're talking about- really, the ship you should be comparing the new Moa with, is the Eagle. It has 2109 shield HP currently. Though it's resist profile is slightly different compared to the Moa, a decent EHP number for a blaster eagle I've come up with in EFT is I think about 45k EHP or so. So if we kick down the EHP a bit to account for the fact that the Moa has overall less resists than the Eagle, I'm guessing it'd get... Maybe 38 or 39k EHP? This is mostly an educated guess, I'll be honest.
3) So what if it does comparable DPS to a battlecruiser. WHOA, YOU ARE NOW SHAKING UP THE BATTLEFIELD. THERE ARE REASONS TO USE CRUISERS OVER BATTLECRUISERS, AND VICE VERSA! Wow. Whole new paradigm. Choosing a ship to better suit your purpose. Want more tank? Go with a battlecruiser. Want more mobility? Regular cruiser. Just because a ship is larger does not mean it must inherently be better than smaller ships, which it sounds like something you're thinking. Still, the Ferox would not be technically worse than the Moa- Do NOT ignore that range bonus. The Ferox may be doing the same damage as the Moa, but it's hitting further out. This does not ever stop being relevant.
4) The battlecruisers you're comparing the 5/5/4 Moa to, the armor cane, brutix and harbinger. They hurt. Alot. So even if we do somehow get 60k EHP Moas (What? What the hell fit are you even proposing here? T2 rigs? Faction/deadspace invuln?) you're forgetting that all of these BCs have damage bonii too. And at least one more gun than the Moa.

I'm starting to get the feeling that you're not trying to see the whole picture here. Also, the fact that battlecruisers are slated for this kind of rebalancing in the future as well. So doubtlessly they'll be made to work well with cruisers and below, and stop being the be all end all for PvP as it is now.

And you still haven't directly specified the meaning of "TAR TAR". Though if I were to guess at it's meaning, it's definitely one of your defining characteristics.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#452 - 2012-10-09 18:26:48 UTC
Aglais wrote:
Ok. Several things.

1) Ferox has a range bonus. Even if the Moa is doing more damage, it has to get closer which again necessitates that if it's using blasters it'll need a webifier.
2) What the hell kind of fit are you even considering here?! Currently, I can't get a Moa with more than about 32k EHP, which is just over HALF that of the battlecruisers you're talking about- really, the ship you should be comparing the new Moa with, is the Eagle. It has 2109 shield HP currently. Though it's resist profile is slightly different compared to the Moa, a decent EHP number for a blaster eagle I've come up with in EFT is I think about 45k EHP or so. So if we kick down the EHP a bit to account for the fact that the Moa has overall less resists than the Eagle, I'm guessing it'd get... Maybe 38 or 39k EHP? This is mostly an educated guess, I'll be honest.
3) So what if it does comparable DPS to a battlecruiser. WHOA, YOU ARE NOW SHAKING UP THE BATTLEFIELD. THERE ARE REASONS TO USE CRUISERS OVER BATTLECRUISERS, AND VICE VERSA! Wow. Whole new paradigm. Choosing a ship to better suit your purpose. Want more tank? Go with a battlecruiser. Want more mobility? Regular cruiser. Just because a ship is larger does not mean it must inherently be better than smaller ships, which it sounds like something you're thinking. Still, the Ferox would not be technically worse than the Moa- Do NOT ignore that range bonus. The Ferox may be doing the same damage as the Moa, but it's hitting further out. This does not ever stop being relevant.
4) The battlecruisers you're comparing the 5/5/4 Moa to, the armor cane, brutix and harbinger. They hurt. Alot. So even if we do somehow get 60k EHP Moas (What? What the hell fit are you even proposing here? T2 rigs? Faction/deadspace invuln?) you're forgetting that all of these BCs have damage bonii too. And at least one more gun than the Moa.

I'm starting to get the feeling that you're not trying to see the whole picture here. Also, the fact that battlecruisers are slated for this kind of rebalancing in the future as well. So doubtlessly they'll be made to work well with cruisers and below, and stop being the be all end all for PvP as it is now.

And you still haven't directly specified the meaning of "TAR TAR". Though if I were to guess at it's meaning, it's definitely one of your defining characteristics.



Clearly you are TAR TAR. You come into a thread about changes to certain tech 1 cruisers. You ignore the changes that CCP has proposed. You know! Like the damage bonus and then throw out some random TAR TAR statement about how it doesn't do anything close to Ferox's damage. You are in fact wrong. Now you say that you're not able to get a certain amount of hit points on your Moa, because you're using EFT and our current Iteration of a Moa on Tranquility. You ignore the fact I'm taking CCP's changes into account( increase in base shield amount and how extender rigs effect them) and your suggestions of a 5th midslot. You then SPEW more gar gar.

Well, why don't I agree with you so you can go away. Clap* congratulations!

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#453 - 2012-10-09 18:27:57 UTC
Dr Sheng-Ji Yang wrote:
@Major Killz
please stop trolling in every forum how underpowered and bad minmatar actually are. Everybody knows (really EVERYBODY) that minmatar ships are still completely overpowered and you seem to think we are completely idiots believing your s....hiny stuff.
Rupture is already able to do more than 460dps at almost 18km with damage type choosing plus awesome speed plus tracking that makes every rail and laser guy jealous plus good tank. Not to foreget how powerfull dmg type choosing is.
Stop trolling and thinking we are idiots.



Yes! a Rupture can do 460dps @ 18k Roll

Clap* congratulations!

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Zhephell
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#454 - 2012-10-09 18:28:41 UTC
Major Killz wrote:


Honestly. It's like those players who continue to come this thread going on about how a Rupture does 450damage per second @ 20km. Apparently, actually game mechanics don't apply (falloff). Kinda like 2 inverted damage curves or something TAR TAR.

The propose Moa will infact do more damage compared to a Ferox, because of it's damage bonus. The Ferox would need drones to overcome the difference and even then it's minute (effectively, same damage output). I exaggerated with regard to hit points comparable to a Ferox. It's comparable to a armor-Hurricane, Brutix and Harbinger (60,000 effective hit points). CCP increased it's shield amount which is why it would gain so much from another mid slot and shield extension rigs.

So, yeah! Hit points and damage of teir 1 and some tier 2 battlecruisers.




what the hell have you been drinking?

A moa with 550dps and 60k ehp? That's imposible, the best combat cruiser ll be the rupture and ll have 450 dps and 35k of ehp, or something like that. If a moa could use 550dps + Afterburner or MWD + scrambler, you ll be a 20k or 25k ehp Moa, no more, and it ll have a worst range, and a worst speed.

A 60k ehp Moa, ll be a ship with no speed modules, and no warp disruptor or scrambler, and probably many fitting problems, so it ll be a big **** of ship then.

If you have the intention to prove that i 'm wrong, use the EFT or the PYFA and create a fitting, with no deathspace, comander or navy modules that proves what you're saying, but I can assure you that it ll be impossible, you don't have slots, cpu or power to do that.
OT Smithers
A Farewell To Kings...
Dock Workers
#455 - 2012-10-09 18:29:03 UTC
The Moa obviously needs the fifth midslot. That's a given. It needs a whole lot more than that if it is going to be balanced against the Vexor and Ruppie. But seriously, why bother talking about it?

CCP is gonna do what they do. If they gave a crap about actually BALANCING Caldari ships they would do so. They don't and they aren't. They aren't even trying. This new winter update is gonna leave the Moa and Caracal even further behind then they are today, and they are nerfing the hell out of the Drake and other missile boats and talking about more nerfs coming down the road as soon as they can squeeze them into their busy schedule. So what.

If you want to PvP you need to train and fly another race. Any will do.

The good news, if you want to call it that, is that other than the Drake, CCP isn't actually breaking anything new. Caldari ships are already broken. No one is using them now. No one is gonna find themselves forced to park a ship they use regularly. Caldari pilots who enjoy PvP were already flying some other race. They damn sure weren't flying Caldari ships. And if, as it appears, CCP wants to make these ships that much worse than they are today, it's not a change. The Caldari will continue on as they always have: wasted skill points and broken hulls cluttering up the hangar.

Whatever.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#456 - 2012-10-09 18:55:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Killz
Zhephell wrote:
Major Killz wrote:


Honestly. It's like those players who continue to come this thread going on about how a Rupture does 450damage per second @ 20km. Apparently, actually game mechanics don't apply (falloff). Kinda like 2 inverted damage curves or something TAR TAR.

The propose Moa will infact do more damage compared to a Ferox, because of it's damage bonus. The Ferox would need drones to overcome the difference and even then it's minute (effectively, same damage output). I exaggerated with regard to hit points comparable to a Ferox. It's comparable to a armor-Hurricane, Brutix and Harbinger (60,000 effective hit points). CCP increased it's shield amount which is why it would gain so much from another mid slot and shield extension rigs.

So, yeah! Hit points and damage of teir 1 and some tier 2 battlecruisers.




what the hell have you been drinking?

A moa with 550dps and 60k ehp? That's imposible, the best combat cruiser ll be the rupture and ll have 450 dps and 35k of ehp, or something like that. If a moa could use 550dps + Afterburner or MWD + scrambler, you ll be a 20k or 25k ehp Moa, no more, and it ll have a worst range, and a worst speed.

A 60k ehp Moa, ll be a ship with no speed modules, and no warp disruptor or scrambler, and probably many fitting problems, so it ll be a big **** of ship then.

If you have the intention to prove that i 'm wrong, use the EFT or the PYFA and create a fitting, with no deathspace, comander or navy modules that proves what you're saying, but I can assure you that it ll be impossible, you don't have slots, cpu or power to do that.




For sure. Use applications that replicate our current enviroment and z current state of ships and completely ignore CCP's proposed changes... Maybe I should have ignore your 5th midslot argument and not factor it into a 5 midslot Moa. You know! with all the changes CCP has propose so far and take a look @ what you suggested CCP should do. Indeed.

Moa:
Cruiser skill bonuses:
5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage
5% bonus to shield resistances
Slot layout: 6 H, 4 M, 4 L, 5 turrets, 2 launchers
Fittings: 800 PWG (+20), 375 CPU (+15)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2100(+225) / 1200(-129) / 1500(-24)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1425(+50) / 475s(-16.25s) / 3 (+0.2)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 195(+31) / 0.54 / 11720000 / 5.9s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 15 / 15
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 55km / 260(+7) / 7
Sensor strength: 17 Gravimetric (+1)
Signature radius: 135
Cargo capacity: 450 (+200)

Factor in new shield amount (shieldCapacityBonus Shield Capacity Bonus 15.00 %), damage bonus and 5th mid slots. Insert modules which will become easier to fit because of CCP's proposed improved powergrid and cpu changes. Round some numbers and you get a 60k Moa with 550dps (no heat). It's not even that bad compared to a Vexor.

No to extra midslot!

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#457 - 2012-10-09 18:57:54 UTC
OT Smithers wrote:
The Moa obviously needs the fifth midslot. That's a given. It needs a whole lot more than that if it is going to be balanced against the Vexor and Ruppie. But seriously, why bother talking about it?

CCP is gonna do what they do. If they gave a crap about actually BALANCING Caldari ships they would do so. They don't and they aren't. They aren't even trying. This new winter update is gonna leave the Moa and Caracal even further behind then they are today, and they are nerfing the hell out of the Drake and other missile boats and talking about more nerfs coming down the road as soon as they can squeeze them into their busy schedule. So what.

If you want to PvP you need to train and fly another race. Any will do.

The good news, if you want to call it that, is that other than the Drake, CCP isn't actually breaking anything new. Caldari ships are already broken. No one is using them now. No one is gonna find themselves forced to park a ship they use regularly. Caldari pilots who enjoy PvP were already flying some other race. They damn sure weren't flying Caldari ships. And if, as it appears, CCP wants to make these ships that much worse than they are today, it's not a change. The Caldari will continue on as they always have: wasted skill points and broken hulls cluttering up the hangar.

Whatever.



Thank ECM JESUS for our new Caracal 07 and easier fitting sml and hams.

PRAISE HIM!

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Aglais
Ice-Storm
#458 - 2012-10-09 18:58:41 UTC
Major Killz wrote:


Clearly you are TAR TAR. You come into a thread about changes to certain tech 1 cruisers. You ignore the changes that CCP has proposed. You know! Like the damage bonus and then throw out some random TAR TAR statement about how it doesn't do anything close to Ferox's damage. You are in fact wrong. Now you say that you're not able to get a certain amount of hit points on your Moa, because you're using EFT and our current Iteration of a Moa on Tranquility. You ignore the fact I'm taking CCP's changes into account( increase in base shield amount and how extender rigs effect them) and your suggestions of a 5th midslot. You then SPEW more gar gar.

Well, why don't I agree with you so you can go away. Clap* congratulations!


You aren't taking CCP's changes into account if you think there's going to be a Moa with both 550 DPS and 60k EHP. I can see 550 and 33-36k EHP.

Regardless, I was about to end this argument myself, because I'm actually feeling dumber after having had to interact with someone as unfathomably dense as you've proved yourself to be across almost all of these threads. This doesn't mean I'm leaving the thread. From this point forward I will simply ignore any and all of your unprocessed garbage you try to pass off as a post.

Anyways, people who are whinging about the Caracal in this thread for some reason: Guided Missile Precision is going to effect HAMs, and I'm hearing that they're going to be able to actually hurt things their size and maybe even smaller. Not to mention HAMs are going to be easier to fit. So Caldari, despite what many of you think, aren't going to be utterly broken. I can guarantee I'm going to be flying quite a few Caracals this winter.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#459 - 2012-10-09 19:06:26 UTC
Aglais wrote:
Major Killz wrote:


Clearly you are TAR TAR. You come into a thread about changes to certain tech 1 cruisers. You ignore the changes that CCP has proposed. You know! Like the damage bonus and then throw out some random TAR TAR statement about how it doesn't do anything close to Ferox's damage. You are in fact wrong. Now you say that you're not able to get a certain amount of hit points on your Moa, because you're using EFT and our current Iteration of a Moa on Tranquility. You ignore the fact I'm taking CCP's changes into account( increase in base shield amount and how extender rigs effect them) and your suggestions of a 5th midslot. You then SPEW more gar gar.

Well, why don't I agree with you so you can go away. Clap* congratulations!


You aren't taking CCP's changes into account if you think there's going to be a Moa with both 550 DPS and 60k EHP. I can see 550 and 33-36k EHP.

Regardless, I was about to end this argument myself, because I'm actually feeling dumber after having had to interact with someone as unfathomably dense as you've proved yourself to be across almost all of these threads. This doesn't mean I'm leaving the thread. From this point forward I will simply ignore any and all of your unprocessed garbage you try to pass off as a post.

Anyways, people who are whinging about the Caracal in this thread for some reason: Guided Missile Precision is going to effect HAMs, and I'm hearing that they're going to be able to actually hurt things their size and maybe even smaller. Not to mention HAMs are going to be easier to fit. So Caldari, despite what many of you think, aren't going to be utterly broken. I can guarantee I'm going to be flying quite a few Caracals this winter.



More like you fianlly figured it out and have accepted you're wrong. Maybe you decided that you wanted to put stasis webifier into z 5th mid slot because you're DENSE ROFL.
Low $lutz - DC, Else----->>> Maybe damage mods but in your case warp stabs Lol
Mid $lutz - LSE, LSE, MWD, Invul, SCRAM.
high $lutz - Turrets ------>>>>>>

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#460 - 2012-10-09 19:17:04 UTC
So how much tank should a 661+ dps T1 cruiser (overheated) have? More than 36k EHP (overheated)? That's the Moa. Quit complaining. Big smile